3/3^ 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 498 880 2 f 



315 
»544 
'py 1 




S 



Zly>c<^^r C^^^ 



^♦ 



TO THE HON. SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY. 



Washington City, March 2Q, 1849. 

Sir : I beg leave most respectfully to call your attention to an 
act of Congress, approved the 10th of August, 1846, in the follow- 
ing words : 
" Joint Resolution declaratory of the act passed on the twenty-third 

August, eighteen hundred and forty-two, entitled an act for the 

relief of Charles F. Sibbald. 

" Resolved, 4'C., That in carrying into effect the act entitled an act 
for the relief of Charles F. Sibbald, passed twenty-third August, 
eighteen hundred and forty-two, the Secretary of the Treasury of the 
United States, be, and he is hereby, authorized and required to audit 
and liquidate the claims and demands of said Sibbald, upon princi- 
ples of law and equity, and in such manner as to secure said Sib- 
bald an indemnification for the injuries and damages sustained by 
him, occasioned by the interference of the agents of the Govern- 
ment with his property and rights, and on such proofs as are usu- 
ally received in similar cases by the accounting officers of the 
Government." 

And I have respectfully to refer you to the enclosed, as showing 
that the authority thus delegated to the Secretary of the Treasury 
of the United States, as to the rights comprehended and conferred 
and vested in me by this act of Congress, remain wholly unexecu- 
ted. It therefore becomes my duty respectfully to ask, at your 
hands, the execution of the law, in order that the " claims and de- 
mands" comprehended in the act, laid before Congress, and made 
on the law and evidence established by Congress, shall be audited, 
liquidated, and paid. 

I have the honor to be, sir, most respectfully. 

Your obedient servant, 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 



CLAIM OF CHAS. F. SIBBALD, OF PHILADELPHIA. 

The question most respectfully presented for the consideration 
of the honorable the Secretary of the Treasury of the United 
Sta<^es now is, what is the position of the said claim, under the act 
of the 23d of August, 1842, and the supplemental declaratory reso- 
lution of the 10th of August, 1846? 

This is a claim for the destruction of property and damages, as 
laid before Congress, and asserted by a citizen of the State of Penn- 
sylvania, on the Government of the United States, as contra-dis- 
tinguished from other claims, in being founded upon law and testi- 
mony established by Congress, as regards the accounts, " claims, and 
demands" ^-f. 

The evidence of the case establishes that the claimant, a resi- 
dent merchant and native of the city of Philadelphia, was the 
owner of a Spanish land grant in Florida, conceded on the condi- 
tion of the construction of a water Saw-mill, M'hich was built soon 



after the grant was made ; that in accordance with the provisions 
of" the grant the land was located and surveyed in several detached 
places, comprehending 10,000, 4,000, and 2,000 acres, which was 
covered with yellow pine, red cedar, live oak, and other wood, 
while a large portion of the lands were valuable for agricultural 
purposes. That in order to render this estate productive, and fol- 
lowing up the conditions of the grant, the claimant, from his com- 
mercial domicil in the city of Philadelphia, at vast cost, entered 
on the construction of several steam saw-mills of immense power 
and capacity, to saw up his pine timber growing on the 10,000 
acre tract, which, being situated on the immediate seaboard, afford- 
ed a position for business vmsurpassed in health, which vessels of 
large burden could approach ; and induced hy the treaty with 
Spain, which admitted Spanish vessels with immense advantages,^ 
in entering Spanish ports, he established a commercial depot on 
said tract, with other various extensive business, and also entered 
into contracts to furnish for the Navy Department several hundred 
thousand dollars worth of live oak timber, to be taken as far as 
practicable from these lands : and for the execution of which con- 
tracts he was placed under heavy bonds. That while his fortune 
and commercial reputation were thus embarked and dependent, his 
entire business was broken up by officers of the United States, who 
entered upon the lands, under general authority to consider all 
Spanish grants as public lands antil otherwise determined by judi- 
cial decision or acts of Congress, by which acts of the Government 
he was prevented from cutting either the timber to supply his saw- 
mills, or his live oak conlracts ; and, as a direct, necessary, and un- 
avoidable consequence, that his saw-mills, and their appurtenances,, 
were wholly destroyed by "dilapidation and decay" — his contracts 
prevented from being execute ' — his entire investments sunk — his 
whole estate sticrificed and lost, and the claimant overwhelmed in 
Uifilculty and ruin. 

These facts, as derived from the testimony, were substantially 
detailed and set forth by the claimant in his petition to Congress 
for redress, soon after the grant was confirmed by the Supreme 
Court of the United States, on the 6th of February, 1836. — (Sihbald 
vs. the United States, 10 Peters.) 

On this statement of facts, supported by a correspondence with 
the Treasury and Navy Departments, the Attorney General, and 
other officers of the Government, a resolution was passed by the 
House of Representatives requiring the Secretary of the Treasury 
to take further evidence to develope the case. This duty was per- 
formed at the several points of examination, by the District Attor- 
neys of the United States, and the Consul in Cuba ; the evidence, 
including that of several officers of the Government, returned to 
Congress, when, after an elaborate examination made by both 
Houses, they united in an act for the relief of tlu; claimant, which 
was unaninioiisli/ passed, accompanied l)y a detailed report setting 
forth the facts tlius cstal>lished. 

The following is an extract of the act of the 23d of August, 1842 : 

" Be it enacted, ^-c, That the Third Auditor of the Treasurj-, 
tinder the direction of the Attorney General, be, and is hereby, di- 



rected to ascertain the actual damages which Charles F. Sibbald 
has sustained, and would be entitled to recover, upon principles of 
law as applicable to similar cases, by reason of the interference of 
any agent or agents of the United States, with the use, possession, 
or enjoyment of his lands, tiynber, mills, or other py^operty, ^-c." 

By this act all the damages sustained by reason of the interfer- 
ence with the use, possession, or enjoyment of his lands, timber, mills, 
or other property, are directed to be ascertained, and paid by the Se- 
i^ cretary of the Treasury, while the report of the House, which ac- 
^ companied this act, was so expressive of the wrong inflicted, and 
j« the reparation which should follow to indemnify that wrong. 
^ Nevertheless, the claimant was compelled to apply to Congress 
*^-for an explanatory act, which, like the first, was unanimously pass- 
f,^ ed, accompanied by a report of the Judiciary Committee of the 
Senate expressive of its designs, and also their views as to the de- 
^- signs of the former act, which the claimant had maintained in his 
4; second petition, and embodied the report of the House of Repre- 
, sentatives as showing that the first act merely left a calculation of 
^1 his accounts as the performance of the duty of the Auditor ; and 
certainly the following determines that question : 
"Joint Resolution declaratory of the act passed twenty-third Au- 
gust, eighteen hundred and forty-two, entitled ' An act for the 
relief of Charles F. Sibbald.' " 

Resolved, ^c, That in carrying into effect the act entiled an act 
for the relief of Charles F. Sibbald, passed tv»^enty-third August, 
eighteen hundred and forty-two, the Secretary of the Treasury 
of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized and required, 
to audit and liquidate the claims and demands of said Sibbald upon 
principles of law and equity, and in such manner as to secure to said 
Sibbald an indemnification for the injuries and damages sustained 
by him, occasioned by the interference of the agents of the Govern- 
ment with his property and rights, and on such proofs as are usually 
received in similar cases by the accounting officers of the Govern- 
ment," 

This is the authority delegated by Congress without a dissenting 
voice, with the accounts, " claims, and demands,'"' as submitted, laid 
before the National Legislature a second time. The claimant had 
from the earliest moment laid kis claims and demands before Con- 
gress; the account or approximated statement in the book of evi- 
dence will prove this fact. The laws of damages, supported by 
decisions of the Supreme Court, were also laid before Congress to 
sustain the accounts as then made. 

Congress, in order fully to develope the case, and to ascertain the 
amount of the damages, directed the Secretary of the Treasury to 
take evidence, which was done on the universal principles of law, 
that the despoiler is obliged not only to restore the property, but 
also the fruits or profits it would have yielded until reparation or 
indemnity is made. The interrogatories made at the Departments, 
it will be seen, incorporate the law with that evidence, by requir- 
ing the witnesses to respond as to the destruction of property, and 
the destruction of the fruits or profits, which evidence, thus taken, 
was returned to Congress, approved and affirmed, in its unanimous 



action, which evidence cannot be severed or separated. Thus con- 
clusively establishing, that Congress has furnished the data on 
which " the claims and demands" are founded, ^vhich were before 
the Legislature, and which the Legislature ordered to be audited, 
liquidated, and paid. Let these principles applied to the evidence 
produce what it may, it is respectfully asserted, that these are the 
rights vested by Congress in the claimant. 

And what has been done to carry '^i?ito effecf the comprehensive 
provisions of the two acts passed for the relief of the claimant, while 
his sufferings and losses have been so deeply aggravated by delay ? 

This question is not difficult to answer, as the following will 
evince, that nothing whatever has been done pursuant to the law. 

The late Secretary of the Treasury referred the case to the Comp- 
troller, as the claimant had supposed merely to calculate, " audit, or 
liquiate" " his claims and demands.'''' But after making various al- 
lowances for the destruction of the saw mills, their " /we" and ope- 
ration, the store, &c., &c., the Comptroller concluded to go behind 
what his principals had in the clearest language, by their reports, 
declared determined, and raised a question as to the interference 
on which these allowances had been founded by him, and finally 
proposed to allow the claimant for what he supposed the claimant 
might, if ejected or turned off his own property, have procured the 
logs of others to operate his saw mills, for one year only ; thus 
avoiding the damages for their destruction, their " use'^ and opera- 
tion, and the payment of all damages resulting from the overthrow 
of the entire dependent business. 

Thus the Comptroller, whose duties are always arduous, may 
have overlooked the testimony, by proposing to allow the claimant 
for what he. the Comptroller supposed the claimant could, if ejected 
or turned of of his own property, have procured the timber from 
others to operate his saw mills for one year, while the evidence, as 
annexed, and the reports of Congress, show beyond all doubt, that 
no such alternative existed. That the prohibition of cutting the 
timber was extended to all Spanish grants. The late Secretary of 
the Treasury, on reviewing this report, at once put down this ques- 
tion of interference thus raised by the Comptroller, and whom, it 
will appear, subsequently acquiesced in these views, as the report 
of the Secretary will evince, so that in fact these doings, simulta- 
neously made, open the case ; for the Comptroller says, on the pro- 
viso of an interference, the claimant is entitled to be paid for the 
destruction of his saw mills, &c., for their " use" and operation, &c., 
&c., while the Secretary demonstrates, that this interference lasted 
uninterruptedly for many years. 

Therefore, the late Secretary of the Treasury, on what was thus 
brought to his notice, says in his report, dated the 2d .Tune, 1847, 
that " in the event of the logs of others being used, instead of the 
timber of the claimant, that timber would still be left standing on 
the land as his property; therefore a deduction of one-half should 
be made on that account, Avhich would bring down the last men- 
tioned sum to $'2,133 82. And that — 

" By the original and su{)plemental act for the relief of Mr. Sib- 
bald, it would appear to have been the opinion of Congress, that 



the interference may have continued from 1828 to 7th February, 
1830, at which time the title to the said property was confirmed to 
the said Charles F. .Sibbaid by the Supreme Court of the United 
States." The Secretary then continues to say : " I concur with you 
as to the time of the commencement of the m^cr/ere^ice,. namely, 
about the 1st July, 1829 ; you have, however, allowed damages for 
the interference of one year only, whereas the law would seem to 
contemplate, that the interference continued from its commencement 
uninterruptedly up to the 1th of February, 1836." " Upon the care- 
fid examination of the testimony, I do not find any evidence that the 
interference was withdrawn, interrupted, or discontinued, up to the 
7th February, 1830." " If there be any evidence in the case which 
may have been overlooked by me, you will please refer me to it with 
your views thereon. If there be no such evidence, you will please 
to allow damages at the rate before stated, of i2,133 82 per an- 
num, for the wliole period of the interference," with interest, &c. 
But this decision of the Supreme Court did not restore the claim- 
ant to the possession of the property which was previously sacri- 
ficed by the Government. By this report of the late Secretary of 
the Treasury the following points are most conclusively established, 
as they were years since by Congress, as the reports will evince. 

First. That there was an " uninterrupted interference,''' which 
deprived the claimant of the use of his property from July, 1829, 
to the 1th of February, 1836, when his title to the land was confirmed 
by the Supreme Court of the United States. 

Secondly. That the acts of Congress contemplate this " interfer- 
ence," and which is sustained by the reports of Congress. 

Thirdly. That the Comptroller harmonized in these views which 
therefore reconciles his report on this point of difficulty, as to the 
interference, as entertained, and as far as that report is considered, 
would throw it open for his previous allowances for the destruction 
of the mills, property, and business, made on the proviso of an inter- 
ference, or such as conform to the law and evidence on those heads. 
The Comptroller made these allowances on the proviso of an in- 
terference, the Secretary determined as to the interference, the 
Comptroller, it seems, acquiesced in this decision, so as the case 
stands on these doings, it is thrown open by this simultaneous ac- 
tion. But the allowance, as finally made by the Comptroller, can 
neither be sustained under the law or testimony, as will be seen. 

By the act of the 10th of August, 1846, "the Secretary of the 
Treasury is required to audit and liquidate the claims and deinands 
of said Sibbaid upon principles of law and e(pnty^' &c. " The claims 
and demands of said Sibbaid are "required" to be " audited," &lc. 

But here is an allowance proposed by the Comptroller for what 
the claimant, he had supposed, could procure "the logs of others'' to 
operate his saw mills. How can such an item as this be allowed? 
Did the claimant ever make or assert such such a " claiin or demand'" 
as this ? Is there any evidence whatever to sustain such an item ? 
Any entry, book account, or voucher ivhatever of any description ? 
Any law, or principle of law, on the ground that a person is turned 
off, or ejected from his own property, that could, for an item, whiclf 
had no existence iv fact, be awarded, allowed, or paid ? Thus the 



only action of the Department under the act of the 10th August, 
1846, (by inadvertence,) is illegal. 

Is there any law or principle of law on the admitted fact, that 
a person is turned out o( possession of his own property many years, 
that could compel him to seek the property of others to sii})port his 
undertakings ? Is not the legal answer " you turned me out of pos- 
session and kept me out," {as you have demonstrated) so " you must 
pay the damages." While such a pretension as this cannot for one 
moment be sustained, it will be conclusively shown by reference to 
the testimony herewith submitted, marked A, that no such allcrna- 
tive existed, that evidence incontestibly proves that no such timber 
was cut, procured, or could be obtained, that every attempt to procure 
the timber " of others"^ was resisted by the Government, " that thou- 
sands of logs" tlius seized " w ere left to rot in the icoods^' and that 
this is sustained by Congress, as one of the " facts established" by 
the report of the House of Representatives. Neither for one mo- 
ment can the other proposition stand before the evidence with regard 
to the timber left on the land, as the testimony annexed, marked B, 
will evince. 

On this proof, asserted by such authority, of this " continued in- 
terference,'^ which reus not withdrawn, interrupted, or discontinued 
until the vSupreme Court confirmed the title to the land, and which 
" interference is contemplated by the act and supplemental act," 
as the inevitable consequences '"directly jiowing^'' from these acts of 
the Government, are shown by the evidence and the reports of Con- 
gress, to have resulted in the total destruction of the saw mills, build- 
ings, and equipme7its, their use and operation, and the despoiliation of 
the undertakings of the claimant generally, it would seem wholly 
unnecessary to stop to argue or inquire what are the rights vested 
in the claimant or duties now enjoined on ''the Secretary of the 
Treasury of the United States" in carrying into effect the provi- 
visions of the act of the 23d of August, 1842, and the .Joint decla- 
ratory Resolution of the 10th of August, 1840, passed for the relief 
of the claimant. 

In the petition to Congress for restitution for the aggression, the 
claimant had alleged that his entire business pursuits were over- 
thrown and dest7-oyed by the Government. Congress directed the 
Secretary of the Treasury to take evidence to develope the case ; 
that duty tvas performed, that evidence returned to Congress. The 
laws of damages as assumed by the Treasury Department, on the 
the law of the universe, approved by Congress, and aflirmed by its 
action and debates upon the case ; these " claims and demands^'' 
as made upon this law and evidence laid before Congress, read be- 
fore Congress, debated, and unanimously sanctioned and approved, 
and Congress after an elaborate examination of the whole case, with 
the claims and demands as asserted before them, again and again 
satisfied of the wrong indicted, and determined to make reparation 
for that wrong, direct the Secretary of the Treasury in the very 
words of the act and .Joint Resolution, to do what ! " To carry info 
effect" and "to audit and li(/uidate the claims and demands of said 
Sibbald upon principles of lau) and equity, in such manner as to se- 
cure said Sibbald an indemnification for the injuries and damages 



sustained by him, occasioned by the interference of the agents of the 
Government with his property and rights, on such proofs as are 
usually received in similar cases by the accounting officers of the 
Government." These are the words of the law. 

It would after this be quite unnecessary to stop to argue that the 
claimant built those mills, entered into those contracts, engage- 
ments, and undertakings, and embarked his fortune in life to use 
his own property, and not " the property of others ;"' and as it has 
been conclusively and incontrovertibly shown and admitted by the 
late Secretary of the Treasury, and also by Congress, as their re- 
ports evince, that he was prevented from using that very property 
that alone induced him to embark in those undertakings which 
were wholly arrested and destroyed. There is no color or con- 
struction of law that can impair or avert for the consequences 
which have followed on the losses, " injuries cnid damages'" sustain- 
ed or ^^ occasioned" in the wrong inflicted by the Government in the 
" unintern'upted interference,^'' as declared by the late Secretary of 
the Treasury, and Congress, in the acts passed for his relief And 
it would have been wholly unnecessary, in order to establish these 
existing rights under the law, to show, or by a word to prove it, 
that he was debarred from obtaining the property " o/" oZAers" to 
support his undertakings. 

His petition to Congress, the reports of Congress, the evidence 
taken by Congress, and the law, in the two acts passed for his re- 
lief, show that he entered into those pursuits, engagements, or un- 
dertakings to use his own property, and not the property of others, 
which no one will attempt to controvert or call in question, or at- 
tempt to assume, that there was an existing obligation after being 
turned off; that he was compelled to procure the property of others 
(which it is proved he could not do) to support his undertakings. 
The claimant only asks that the rights conferred in the acts passed 
for his relief shall be carried " iiito effect" That the evidence shall 
be justli/ applied to the law in the measure of damages established 
by Congress and the Treasury Department. That his accounts are 
made upon the law and principles thus established. Upon evidence 
thus taken, no one will attempt to controvert. 

The claimant would, with these views, with the most profound 
respect, submit that the law remains wholly unexecuted ; that these 
doings of the Department have, in the united action of the Comp- 
troller, and in what has been demonstrated by the late Secretary 
of the Treasury, divested the case of all difficulty ; and would now, 
therefore, desire to show what was his actual position and com- 
mercial standing in life, when the Government thus destroyed his 
fortune — as contra-distinguished with his present position — in or- 
der that it shall be seen, that whatever result the measure of dam- 
ages as applied shall be, that no pecuniary recompense can com- 
pensate for his sufferings and losses for eighteen years of the best 
days of his life. 

Since the report of the Comptroller was made, a minute and 
elaborate examination has been made of his books — exhibiting 
therein a schedule of the state of his affairs at two distinct peri- 
ods ; the one when he commenced these undertakings, induced by 



his Floridian possessions ; the other at the date when the Secreta- 
ry of the Treasury has declared the disturbance to have been com- 
plete— "about the 1st July, 1829." 

The first of these Avill evince that when the claimant commen- 
ced these operations, the extent of which too goes to establish the 
fact, and without M^hich he could not have undertaken them, that he 
enjoyed a high commercial position, while his property was valued 
at exceeding one hundred thousand dollars. Which his books prove, 
as the schedule will evince, was clear of all incumbrance. 

The second, that when his large mill, with " 48 saws," was ready 
to operate, at the date which has been fixed by the late Secretary 
at which the disturbance was complete on the mill tract, to wit : 
"about the 1st July, 1829," his total indebtedness did not exceed 
$38,216: that his assets, including the $16,000 which would have 
been paid by Mr. Grice but for the interference, would have more 
than liquidated the indebtedness, so that his whole landed estate and 
mills icould have been free ; besides an income then, as proved by 
nearly thirty witnesses, from his ?nills, cojitracts, timber, stores, 
lands, ship-building, Cuba trade, ^-c, beyond which, as the books 
evince, an unbounded credit with many of the largest and most 
respectable commercial houses in this country, to compass any 
prudent object that he might desire, mercantile or otherwise. 
Such was the position of the claimant when the Government broke 
dowai, swept his entire estate — including the lands confirmed by the 
Suprc7ne Court— from him ; left him for a period of eighteen years 
of the best days of his life, to struggle with these consequences ; 
daily, it may be said, to undergo the tortures of mind and distress 
in every way and shape that can be conceived, with executions and 
persecutions, until now, with interest compounded, this indebtedness 
forced upon him by the Government, has accumulated and multi- 
plied, frequently at the rate of two and three per cent, per month, 
to an extent almost beyond belief. 

These facts being supported by the evidence, and proving that 
the law remains to be executed, let us again revert to show how 
far Congress has gone in establishing the law of the case, as well 
as the Departments'. It is repeated that from the earliest moment 
the claimant asserted his " claims and douands," and laid them be- 
fore Congress — and it has been already said that these accounts were 
made upon principles of law, decided in several cases by the Supreme 
Court and laid before Congress, as well as on the universal law, as 
adopted by all civilized nations in cases of damages, — showing that 
the despoiler is bound not onl}" to restore the property, but also the 
fruits or profits it would have yielded, until such reparation shall 
be made ; without this the claimant could not be made whole in 
fortune, and that these principles were argued in the Senate where 
the accumulative account was read, and met unanimous approval — 
they cannot be controverted. Also, that the Secretary of the Trea- 
sury had incorporated these principles of law, loitli the evidence 
taken, as the law of the case, as will be seen by ihe interrogatories 
prepared at the Treasury, the result of which was returned to Con- 
gress and met its unanimous sanction and afiirmation. 

Mr. Legarc, the Attorney General, under special authority dele- 



gated, also laid down this law, in directing that all "such tJamages 
should be allowed as directly jloio in the natural and ordinary course 
of tilings, from the trespass or omission^'' and this Attorney General 
gave an illustration of the law by directing that, " if it be proved 
that the interference of a Government agent directly and necessa- 
rily stopped the working of the mills, or produced their destruc- 
tion, the measure of damages must then be ascertained on the pro- 
bahle nett proceeds of the Mills, for the time during which it was 
so prevented from working, and the true value of the mill, not the 
price of (its) construction.'^ 

The application of these instructions to the views entertained by 
the report of the Secretary, of an ^^uninterrupted, interference'" in 
cutting the timber to work the mills, would " directly and necessa- 
rihf meet these items of loss. 

These rules have been too often and too extensively applied by 
Congress, as M'ell as by the Departments, and, under the Conven- 
tion with Mexico, by our judicial tribunals, as shown, and of such 
universal application that reference to the precedents cited, and 
Avhich will be found among the printed documents, of their appli- 
cation under the English, French, and Spanish authorities, that 
they cannot be questioned or controverted. Congress legislated 
with the accounts made on these rules of law before them, never- 
theless have required, with a decision and determination of pur- 
pose unprecedented, that " tlie claims and demands'" of the claimant 
thus asserted shall be " audited, liquidated, and paid," notwithstand- 
ing the large amounts brought to view before Congress, and vv'hich 
too \\ ere laid before the country. Thus Congress has assumed all re- 
sponsibility — have shown the facts established, as to the wrong in- 
flicted — taken evidence as to the extent of the wrong, and determined, 
and established the measure of the damages, " to secure an indemni- 
fication" for that wrong. The doors of the Treasury are thus 
widely as the law thrown open, for the payment of " claims and 
demands" in fact made out by Congress. 

The remaining question is, does any barrier exist to the faithful 
performance of the duties, enjoined under the acts passed for the 
relief of the claimant, in consequence of this action of the Depart- 
ments, thus shown to have been made under such a misconception 
of the facts and the law, and for no "claim or demand" ichich ex- 
isted, or had ever been asserted by the claimant or Congress. 

Numerous instances have occurred where the decisions or opin- 
ions of one Secretary have been reconsidered and reviewed, and 
awards made by his successor. 

The Supreme Court of the United States has decided this right 
of late, which will be found in the 15th vol. Peters' Reports, p. 401, 
the United Slates vs. the Bank of the Metropolis. 

Mr. Justice Wayne there delivered the opinion of the Court, that 
" this right in an incumbent of revieicing a predecessor's decisions, 
extends to mistakes in matters of fact, arising from errors in calcu- 
lation, and to causes of rejected claims, on ivhich material testimony 
is afterwards discovered.'''' 

It is respectfully submitted, that as " the Secretary of the Trea- 
sury of the United States" has been delegated with special authority 



10. 

in this case, to perform certain acts in auditing, liquidating, and 
paying " claims and demands" which remain ivhoHy unliquidated, 
no such authority as this can be necessary. Nevertheless the fol- 
lowing certainly present testimony, since " discovered," to have a 
very important bearing on the allowance of the Comptroller, as 
sanctioned by the late Secretary of the Treasury. 

First. To the " mistakps in the matters of fact," discovered and 
herein developed. 

Second. It in discovered that the books kept in Florida completely 
upset this alloicance as made for " the logs of others" had to operate 
the saw mills, on showing that only three thousand tuv hundred and 
seventy-nine logs were had from all sources to operate saw mills as 
sworn to by Mr. Colt, requiring one hundred and twelve logs per 
day, about one month's supply : whereas the Comptroller proposed 
to allow for six year's purchase of logs, believ'ed to exceed one hun- 
dred thousand, although it was proved that the mills had not cut a 
log of timber for a period of five years previous : which allowance 
as made, is unsupported by law, testimony, or any authority what- 
ever. So the " proof discovered" establishes an illegal act perform- 
ed, not authorized or sanctioned by the law or testimony in the case. 

Third. That the reports of Congress show the fact established, 
that all Spanish grants were deemed and treated as public lands, 
and that no timber whatever was permitted to be cut or taken to 
operate the saw mills, and their direct destruction thereby, which is 
supported by the evidence now before the Secretary of the Treasury. 

Fourth. That the Supreme Court of the United States, 10 Pe- 
ters, show that these very rights in lands, timber, and mills that 
were thus assailed, were protected by treaty stipulations, and that 
the claimant was prosecuting the very purposes of his grant on 
grounds of which it was confirmed, when he was thus disturbed 
and his fortune ruined. 

Fifth. That the whole real estate and the personal estate and 
mills appended, confirmed by the Supreme Court, were so involved 
by the action of the Government as to divest the claimant of the lohole 
property, which has been sacrificed and uholli/ lost to him — which has 
not heretofore been asserted — so that the decision of the Supreme 
Court did not restore the claimant to the possession of the property. 

Sixth. That the grant, from Spain secured the rights of the claim- 
ant to cut the timber as is stipulated in the grant, that in stopping 
the cutting of which the Government laid the axe at the very root of 
his undertakings, and destroyed the wliole. 

Wherefore the claimant most respectfully appeals to the Honorable 
''the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States'' to "■ carry into 
effecC the act and supplemental act passed for has relief, and as 
"authorized and required," "to audit and liquidate the claims and 
demands" upon "principles of law and equity, and in such manner 
as to secure him an indemnification for the injuries and damages 
sustained by him, occasioned by the interference of the Government 
with his property and rights, on such proofs as are usually received 
in similar cases by the accounting officers of the Government." 

In conclusion, the claimant begs reference to the accounts, 
"claims, and demands." as submitted to the Department, to the law 



11 

and evidence to sustain these accounts, and to the statements as 
laid before the country. 

The claimant also Begs reference to the decision of the Supreme 
Court, 10 and 12Pets., Sibbald vs. theUrited States, and Arredendo 
vs. the United States, 6 Peters ; whereby the violation of solemn 
treaty stipulations and obligations will be made manifest in the ag- 
gression of the Government on those very rights of property, thus 
declared by the Supreme Court of the United States protected by 
the treaty with Spain, and in violation of the Constitution, which 
guarantees to every citizen of the country the protection of the sa- 
cred rights of property, and the lawful exercise of his rights. All 
of which is most respectfully submitted to the Honorable the Sec- 
retary of the Treasury of the United States, under the act of the 
10th of August, 1846. 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 

Washington City, March 20, 1849. 



The undersigned, having read the aforegoing statement, are of 
opinion : 

1st. That the act of Congress for the relief of Charles F. Sibbald, 
and the joint resolution explanatory of the same, have not been 
executed by the late Secretary. 

2d. That by these, the rights of Charles F. Sibbald to indemnity 
from the United States for all damages sustained by him in his 
various employments, on his lands in Florida, from the interference 
of any officer of the United States with these employments, or any 
of them, is distinctly recognized. 

3d. That the late Secretary of the Treasury has also recognized 
this interference, its duration and extent, but has confined himself 
to a manifestly erroneous mode and measure of indemnity for the 
damages sustained by Charles F. Sibbald, in one only of these em- 
ployments. 

4th. That in relation to all other damages, recognized by the act 
and joint resolution before referred to, they remain unexecuted. 
JOHN MACPHERSON BERRIEN, 
DANIEL WEBSTER, 

Of Counsel iviih C. F. Sibbald, 

Washington, 22f^ March, 1849. 



A. 

Proof taken from the evidt^nce, establishing, that all unconfirmed 
Spanish grants were ordered to be treated as public lands hi/ the 
Departments in Washington. 

That these orders were actually enforced, so that the claimant, 
who it is seen the late Secretary has established, was prevented by 
an " uninterrupted interference" from cutting the timber to supply 
the saw mills, was also debarred from obtaining it elsewhere, and 
the direct destruction of his saw mills, their use and operation, &c. 
thereby, with his entire dependent business. 



12 

1. The United States District Attorney, sworn, who says, that 
" by instructions received by him from George Graham, Esq., Com- 
missioner of the General Land Office, bearing date August 14, 
1828, a copy of which is herewith enclosed, it will appear that all 
lands claimed under Spanish grants then remaining unconfirmed, 
were considered public lands, and to be treated accordingly. — 
Book of Evidence, page 178, 5th Interrogatory. 

Pursuant to previous instruction the District Attorney gave the 
following notice in the " Florida Herald :" 

U. S. Attorney's OrFiCE, 
'SV. Augustine, 11th February, 1828. 

"The undersigned has received instructions to prevent and punish 
the cutting of valuable timber upon the public lands ; these instruc- 
tions extend not only to * live oak and cedar timber, but to timber of 
every description taken from the public lands for the purpose of 
shipping, the use of saw mills,' &c. It is understood, however, that 
these instructions do not apply to timber for fuel, or plantation pur- 
poses." — See appendix. Book of Evidence. 

2. John Rodman, Esq., Collector of Customs at St. Augustine, 
says, that " the District Attorney has given Mr. Acken, (the Gov- 
ernment agent,) his written opinion, that all the grants for mill 
seats, until confirmed by the Government, or decided by the Judi- 
ciary as valid, are to be considered as public property of the laiited 
States, &c. — See page 21. 

Mr. Acken, the agent of the Government commissioned by the 
Navy Department, thus wrote the Secretary of the Navy : 

Washington, September 23, 1828. 

" It will be well for the Secretary of the Treasury to give instruc- 
tions to the different Collectors of Florida, as well as the Collector 
of St. Mary's, Georgia, whose district extends to Nassau river, to 
permit no vessel to clear with live oak or any other timber, without a 
certificate from each individual from whose land it was cut, and the 
particular place from whence shipped, stating the particular tract, 
and whether it has been confirmed by the Board of Land Commis- 
sioners, or otherwise. 

This order, it will appear, was accordingly given, as the following 
letter from the Collector of Customs to the claimant will evince. 
Mr. Rodman, the Collector at St. Augustine, thus wrote the claimant : 
" I am expressly directed by the Secretary of the Treasury to 
seize all timber cut upon these lands, the Government consider all 
lands in Florida, the claims for which have not been confirmed, as 
public lands. — l^f'ge 23. 

The stern application of which is seen in the seizure and con- 
demnation and sale of the brigantine Planter and her cargo, con- 
demned as forfeited by the Ihiited States Circuit Court of Florida, 
in taking a cargo of timber from an unconfirmed »Spanish grant, 
where the Judge declares, by the laws in force a claimant is only 
a tenant at will to use " 320 acres of land by consent of the Secre- 
tary .of the Treasury, not to commit M^aste." — {See decision, pages 
256 to 260, United. States vs. brigantine Planter and cargo.) 

See letter from the District Attorney urging a relaxation of the 



13 

general instructions, " so as to sanction the taking of pine timber 
for the use of saw-mills," communicated in a letter from the Com- 
missioner of the General Land Office to the Secretary of the Trea- 
sury, page 211. 

See reply of the Secretary of the Treasury : That " no sufficient 
reason is perceived for a further modification of the general instruc- 
tions relative to the preservation of the public timber in Florida," 
page 211. 

See letters from claimant to the Attorney General, Secretary of 
the Treasury, Secretary of the Navy, Collector of Customs at St. 
Augustine, Register of Public Lands, &c. 

8. Mr. George Colt, book keeper at the mills, says : " When I 
went there in 1829, a very large steam saw-mill was erecting, with 
eight gangs of saws. It has sawed as many as 112 or 114 logs per 
day in twelve hours. 112 is the number I believe that was sawed 
in one day. 

" Mr. Acken was at the mills several times in the month of June, 
and at one time particularly drove the negroes oft' that were em- 
ployed in cutting logs from the woods, where they were at work, 
by threats of flogging, in consequence of which the negroes returned 
to the mill. All further attempts to cut logs was abandoned in 
consequence of the interference of the Government agent. 

" Mr. Acken some time in the month of June, I think, left the 
country ibr Washington ; there was another agent appointed in the 
place of Mr. Acken, who it was understood by all at the mill would 
carry out the course pursued by the former agent, which prevented 
any further attempt at cutting mill logs on Mr. Sibbald's grant. I 
know that all mill grants not confirmed by the Government of the 
United States were treated as public land. 

"■ Tlir people gcncraUy in that neighborhood iccre stopped from 
cutting mill logs at that period. There were no mill logs brought 
to that mill from January, 1829, to July, 1829. I have to-day re- 
freshed my memory by examining the account books kept by me at 
that time. There were no mill logs charged or credited within 
that period in the mill accounts. These logs brought after July 
were cut on land known as American donation. They were cut 
by Mr. Sully and Mr. Warren, because they could not be cut oft' of 
Mr. Sibbald's grant."' This donation was given of claimant's land, 
500 acres, to Watson. 

By the letter of Mr. Snowden it will be seen that the whole stock 
of logs for saw-mills, as sworn to by Mr. Colt, requiring 112 logs 
per diem, when ready to operate, was 500 logs, whereas the books 
prove the fact that a former mill erected, prior to the interference, 
requiring about 20 logs per diem, is shown to have a stock of 2,766 
logs on hand when finished, which, as Gen. Patton says, " go to 
show conclusively that the interruptions were enforced in full." 

Mr. Colt says, that Mr. Sibbald's whole business was broken up 
there, I attribute to the interference of the Government agent. Mr. 
Sibbald was forced to abandon the business until the land claims 
were confirmed. I was there until the final abandonment of the 
mills and mill property. — See appendix of book of evidence. 



^u.' 



14 

9. See evidence of Samuel Grice, that he M^as prevented cutting 
100,000 cubic feet of timber, and paying claimant SI 6,000 clear 
profit, w'hich is confirmed by an allowance made, but yet remaining 
in the Treasury ; also, that the business of the said Charles F. Sib- 
bald was destroyed in its various branches and details by being dis- 
possessed of his property in the manner aforesaid ; p. 34, and in an- 
swer to the 15th interrogatory, same page, Mr. Grice says, 1 do not 
know or believe any other cause existed for the destruction of the 
business of the said Charles F. Sibbald, except the interposition of 
the officers or agents of the United States, aforesaid. See also, an- 
swers of Charles Snowden, John Gibson, John Rodman, Judge 
Bethune, W. J. Mills, George Colt, &c., to the same interrogatory^ 
substantially in the same \vords. 

10. William Carlyle, Engineer, swore thus : He (claimant) was de- 
prived all the time I was there, of cutting saw logs and live oak, and 
continued to be so when I left there ; page 40, 4th interrogatory. 

11. Peter R. Walker, <^'w.fefef^wright and engineer of the mills, 
swore, that Charles Sibbald could not cut the timber oft' of the 

/ lands, being prohibited by officers of the United States ; page 39, 
3d inteiTogatory. 

12. William L. Newbold swore, that he abandoned his mills in 
consequence of the acts of the Government depriving him of the 
use of his property ; see page 51, 6th interrogatory. 

13. Col. John Warren swore, that he knows that Mr. Sibbald was 
prevented from cutting live oak and pine from his mill tract, by Mr. 
Acken, a Government agent, page 121, 3d interrogatory, and that in 
his (witness's) opinion, Mr. Sibbald's business was destroyed in the 
manner aforesaid, by the acts of the Government; page 124. 

14. Lewis^eming, Esq., swore, that Wm. D. Acken, agent of the 
United States, told witness that he had stopped Mr. Snowden, the 
agent of Mr. Sibbald, from cutting pine timber on Mr. Sibbald's 
mill grant, and it is strongly impressed on his (witness's) mind, 
from the circumstance that he wished to cut some timber from a 
tract of land which he (witness) then owned, near St. Mary's river, 
but Mr. Acken told him if he did so, that he (Acken) should seize 
the timber so cut, &c., and that Mr. Sibliald was compelled to 
abandon his mill because he could not sup])ly it with logs. See 
page 133, 4th interrogatory. 

15. Farquhar Bethune, Esq., sworn ; describes the number of saw 
mills erected by claimant, one of which he says was calculated to 
saw 25,000 feet per day ; then says that Mr. Sibbald was deprived 
of the use of his timber and lands by the agents of the Government 
of the United States — page 136,3d interrogatory; that the acts of 
the Government or its agents, were, in his (witness's) opinion, the 
direct cause of Mr. Sibbald's embarrassments, they deprived him of 
his means and destroyed his credit ; page 137, 10th interrogatory. 

16. William J. Mills, assistant bookkeeper, swore, that Wm. D. 
Acken repeatedly, in my presence, forbid the agents of Mr. Sib- 
bald to cut lumber of any kind from the lands owned by him, as 
veil as to forbid many of ilie settlers and owners of lands in the 
vicinity, of cutting Iu?nber to supply the saw mills — page 142, 3d in- 
terrogatory ; and that the agents of Mr. Sibbald were annoyed for 



15 

more than a year before the stoppage. Contracts were entered into 
with various citizens to supply timber /Vom tJieir lands in the vicini- 
ty, and they were also slopped, and thousands of logs were left to rot 
in the woods by such interference — page 142, 3d interrogatory ; and 
that Mr. Acken, United States agent, asserted, that as the United 
States had not confirmed the titles to the said lands, he held them 
to be the property of the Government, and that any person cutting 
a single tree on the lands would be prosecuted by him for the tres- 
pass — page 145, 4th interrogatory. 

17. .John Rodman, Collector of Customs for many years at St. 
Augustine, fully confirms this evidence, at great length, from pages 
149 to 170, that by his instructions he was ordered to seize the tim- 
ber cut from these lands, that the other agents of the Government 
were so instructed and actually stopped the cutting of all timber ; 
so that the mills had to be abandoned. — He e page 150. 

18. Thomas Stephens, blacksmith at the mills, swore that he saw 
the saw logs that were thus seized laying in the woods " ten years 
afterwards ;" that he '* knew of an agent of the United St^es 
claiming Mr. Sibbald's property, and foi'bidding the laborers to 
cut any more timber," threatening if they did not leave directly, he 
would tie the negroes up and whip them. — Fage 598. That "the 
laborers that came in were so terrified that they would not dare to 
lift another axe." — Page 298. 

19. James Rice, millwright, swore "that he knows of the opera- 
tives of said Sibbald being driven off, and prevented them from cut- 
ting pine timber on his, the said Sibbald's, land, by an agent of the 
United States by the name of Acken ; that the black laborers came 
in from the Avoods where they had been cutting mill logs,V saying, 
that Acken, the agent of the United States, had driven them from 
the woods by threatening to inflict personal injury by whipping 
them. — Page 285. 

B. 

The following evidence conclusively establishes that the proposi- 
tion of the late Secretary of the Treasury as to the timber left 
standing on the land, as the property of the claimant, cannot be 
sustained by the testimony. 

1. Charles Snowden, the agent of the claimant at the mills, 
swore as follows, in answer to the fifth interrogatory propounded 
by the Secretary of the Treasury on the part of the United States : 
" The mills have gone to ruin ; the lands on Mr. Sibbald's grant have 
been pillaged to a great extent by depredators, whom it w s impos- 
sible to control, by reason of his property being treated as public pro- 
perty by the Government agents and public authorities." — Page 14. 

2. George Colt, bookkeeper at the mills, answered that " the mills 
had gone to ruin : the timber has been cut to a very great extent 
(pine timber) from Mr. Sibbald's grant, by squatters in the neighbor- 
hood of it, they treating it as public lands." — Page IIG, 5th Int. 

3. Col. Warren answered that " they have been injured to great 
extent, as persons have been trespassing by cutting the timber for 
years past." — 6lh Int. page 121. 



16 

4. Lewis Fleming, Esq., answered, that " he has reason to believe 
that considerable timber has been taken off of the 10,000 acre tract 
by persons who, from the acts of the Government or its agents, 
have been taught to consider it as public land." — Pogc 130, bth hit. 

5. Judge Bethune answered, that he believes that inconsequence 
of acts of the Government of the United States, mosl of the valu- 
able pine timber on the mill tract on the St. John's river, has been 
destroyed by deprddators, who were taught to consider it as public 
land, and which depradators cannot be prevented by Mr. Sibbald — 
page 137, 5th interrogatory. 

These answers were given in reply to an interrogatory of the 
Secretary of the Treasury, on the part of the United States, as 
follows : 

5th Interrogatory. Were the mills of said Sibbald, or his lands, 
injured, and to what extent, by reason of his being dispossessed 
thereof, or forbidden or deprived of the use tliereof? 

And conclusively controverts the grounds of deduction, made for 
the timber left standing on the land. 

MEMORANDA. 

The following is the obvious incontrovertible result of the evidence in the case : 
1. That the claimant, as proved by the decision and decree of the Supreme Court, was 
ejected, dispossessed, and by forcible means deprived of all use of property by which his 
undertakings thereon were induced, in the construction of saw mills at immense cost, in 
which his fortune, character, and commercial reputation, were embarked, and that he was 
prostrated in his various pursuits dependent on the free use and enjoyment of the property 
thus decided to have been his own by the Supreme Court, and protected by solemn treaty 
stipulatii)ns, while he was exercising the very acts required by these treaty stipulation^thus 
violatedfin erecting mills, and that the consequences were directly as follows : ^— 

1. fne loss and destruction of his saw mills, planing mills, and their appurtenances, ma- 
chinery, engines, buildings, work shops, in the whole cost therecf, for want of the timber 
to operate the mills as proved, the mills requiring exceeding a hundred logs per diem. 

2. The loss of the use and operation of the same. 

3. The ship building commenced, which could not be prosecuted for want of the live 
oak, pine, and other timber. 

4. The contract with the Navy Department for live oak exceeding $300,000 dollars, 
while the claimant was f ommitted in excessive bonds for its delivery. 

5. Damages from Mr. Gricea( whom claimant agreed to protect in cutting the timber, 
(live oak,) and loss of " ,^16,000 cash" payments, " a clear profit." 

6. The store that was broken up by the destruction of claimant's business and commer- 
cial credit. 

7. The vessels bought and chartered sacrificed, and damages resulting to claimant from 
the latter. 

8. The trade under Spanish colors with an advantage of thirty per cent, in duties by the 
treaty with Spain. 

9. The destruction of his commercial credit, as proved to be unlimited previous to the 
interference, and as his business connection with the most eminent houses show. 

10. The extended destruction of his interests at Philadelphia and elsewhere since 1830. 

11. The entire real estate sacrificed in Florida by the embarrassments created by the 
Government, its loss to claimant, also his real estate in Philadelphia, to great extent. 

12. The lands given as donations, portions of his own property, under the donation act 
given to settlers in parcels of 500 to {J40 acres as public land. 

13. The consequence of the suspension of title declared fit the land, all use of it as pro- 
perty being cut off from claimant on a sale or other use, besides the timber needed for his 
mills, contracts, and ship building. 

14. The destruction of the timber or the lands, as proved. 

15. The credit and property of claimant being taken, his being impoverished and disa- 
bled for years to do other business. 

IC. His sufferings, wounded sensibility and honor, and the implication of his commer- 
cial character. 



mill iiiii iiiii ill! mil fiiii mil mil iim mii im m i 

014 498 880 2 



